johannes christian wichard deputy director wipo arbitration and mediation center wipo and cctlds...
TRANSCRIPT
Johannes Christian WichardDeputy Director
WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center
WIPO and ccTLDs
ccTLD Best Practices: Latest and Future developments
Luxembourg, July 10, 2005
Overview
WIPO and how we got involved WIPO Domain Name Experience
– UDRP Statistics– WIPO ccTLD Program
UDRP as a flexible model Essential elements Adjustable elements
Existing approaches
WIPO Experience in Domain Name Dispute Resolution
First WIPO Internet Domain Name Process– UDRP development and implementation
Second WIPO Internet Domain Name Process– Protection of identifiers other than trademarks?
New gTLDs– Implementation of IP protection mechanisms– Report on IP implications of new gTLDs
WIPO ccTLD program– WIPO ccTLD Best Practices for the Prevention and
Resolution of IP Disputes– Dispute resolution provider for 44 ccTLDs
Conflicts
Domain names are used as identifiers Consumers expect trademarks to be present on the
Internet (www.TRADEMARK.com) Domain name can exist only once per gTLD and is
attributed on a “first-come first-served” basis Trademarks are an easy target for “cybersquatters”
– Register trademarks as domain names in order to profit financially on the expense of the trademark owner
Conflict: Hypothetical
<yvessaintlaurent.com> Web Site: “under construction” WHOIS:
– Domain Name registered with US Registrar– In December 1998– Domain registrant in Korea
Offer for sale: USD 10,000
Solution?
File a lawsuit in court
But
Where? (international jurisdiction) Under what law? How to enforce the judgment? Time and Money!
WIPO Internet Domain Name Process
US Government “White Paper” June 1998 Requests WIPO to develop solutions for conflict
between trademarks and domain names WIPO Internet Domain Name Process July 1998 -
April 1999– online consultations and regional consultations with the
“Internet community” Final Report April 30, 1999
WIPO Internet Domain Name Process
Options
Conflict Trademark - Domain Names
CourtsAdministrative
Procedure
A procedure permitting trademark owners to resolve clear cases of abusive domain name registration (cybersquatting) without going to court
Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP)
Developed on the basis of WIPO Recommendations Adopted by ICANN In force since December 1999 Applicable to gTLDs Not applicable to ccTLDs - unless explicit adoption
UDRP ProcedureOverview
Complaint
Deficiencies
+3 +20
+5 +14
3 member Panel?
+5 +15
+10
Response
Notifica
tion
Implement
.Panel A
pp.
Decision
Court?
Average duration: 45-60 days
Multilingual web site with extensive explanations
Model Complaint and Response
400 Panelists from 50 countries
Searchable Index of WIPO UDRP Panel Decisions Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP
Questions
WIPO UDRP Infrastructure
7,633 cases since December 1999– 1999: 1 – 2000: 1,857 – 2001: 1,557 – 2002: 1,207 – 2003: 1,100– 2004: 1,176– Jan.-June 2005: 735
14,474 DNs– .com 77.7%, .net 12.0%, .org 6.7%, .info 2.0%, .biz 1.5%
UDRP StatisticsJune 2005
Decided: 5,551– 4,589 (82.6%) Transfer– 47 (0.8%) Cancellation– 915 (16.5%) Denied
Terminated: – 1.419 (19%) - mostly settlement
Parties from 122 countries– Complainant: US, UK, FRA, GER, SPA– Respondent: US, UK, SPA, ROK, CHINA
12 languages – English, Spanish, Korean, French, German, Chinese, Italian,
Russian, Japanese, Portuguese, Norwegian,
UDRP StatisticsJune 2005
ccTLDs No obligation to adopt the UDRP
– But protection of IP rights? National courts? Less suitable the more “open” a ccTLD is
WIPO ccTLD Program: advice on request– WIPO ccTLD Best Practices
Avoiding conflicts through appropriate registration practices • e.g.: registration agreement, contact details, WHOIS, submission to
administrative procedure
Protecting IP in ccTLDs through administrative procedures• UDRP as a model that can be adjusted and “localized”
UDRP as a flexible model Mandatory procedure on a contractual basis
– Part of domain name registration terms and conditions Comp. UDRP contractual hierachy:
Registrant---Registrar---ICANN Efficient (quick results at moderate costs)
– Direct enforcement Transfer or cancellation (recovery of costs?)
– Limited scope and streamlined procedure Written (online) procedure Single exchange of pleadings Deadlines
– Blocking domain name transfers during the procedure
UDRP as a flexible model Due process safeguards
– Preserve recourse to national courts of justice Facilitates acceptance
• UDRP: less than 1% of all decisions contested
– Neutrality Independent of domain name registration and
administration Impartial and independent decision-makers
• WIPO: 400 Panelists from 50 countries
Reasoned decisions, available to the public
– Notice All possible means (Whois!)
– Burden of proof on Complainant
UDRP as a flexible model Adjustable elements, e.g.:
– Trademarks only or also other identifiers? Trade names, personal names, geographical
indications,... Country names, names and abbreviations of IGOs
– Local/regional rights only or also “foreign” rights? Factor i.a.: “Nexus” requirement for domain name
registration?
– Restricted to bad faith registration and/or use Or any infringement of IP right?
UDRP as a flexible model Adjustable elements, e.g.:
– Procedure Language(s) Number, nationality and qualification of Panelists Local/regional and international dispute resolution providers Fees Combine with mediation element
Balance: – IP owners’ interest in uniformity and possibility of
consolidating complaints against the same dn holder– Need for adaptations to local environment
WIPO ccTLD Experience
Center: Dispute Resolution Provider for 44 ccTLDs – initial period: smaller (.sh) or “de facto” gTLDs (.tv)– then: more established TLDs (.au, .ie, .mx, .nl, .ch, .fr)– 267 cases (30 June 2005)
156 in favor of complainant (mostly transfer) 21 dismissed 66 terminated (mostly settled) 24 pending
WIPO ccTLD Experience
Types of Policies:– UDRP: 30
.ag, .am, .as, .bs, .bz, .cc, .cd, .co, .cy, .dj, .ec, .fj, .gt, .ki, .la, .md, .mw, .na, .nu, .pa, .ph, .pk, .pn, .ro, .sc, .tk, .tt, .tv, .ue, .ve
– Variations of UDRP: 7 .ae, .au, .ie, .ir, .mx, .tm, .ws
– Other administrative procedure (UDRP-inspired): 4 .ch, .li, .fr, .re
– Arbitration: 4 .ac, .nl, .pl, .sh
WIPO ccTLD Experience
WIPO ccTLD database– Links to the websites of 243 ccTLDs
– Availability of registration agreement?
– Existence of WHOIS service?
– Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) procedures? We are grateful for receving your updates
Further Information
Web Site:– http://arbiter.wipo.int
Mailing lists– http://arbiter.wipo.int/subscribe/all.html
E-mail:– [email protected]– [email protected]